Karen Dann

The accused was charged with attempted murder and firearms offences following a drive-by shooting.

The Crown relied on circumstantial evidence linking the accused to the firearm used and the getaway vehicle.

The court found that while the accused was involved as the driver of the vehicle, the Crown failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he had the requisite mens rea for party liability to attempted murder, as there was insufficient evidence he knew the shooter intended to kill the victim.

The accused was acquitted of attempted murder but convicted of the firearms offences.

The accused was charged with discharging a restricted or prohibited firearm and related offences after allegedly firing a handgun twice in the air outside an after-hours party.

The Crown's case relied entirely on circumstantial evidence, primarily video surveillance showing the accused raising his arm, the synchronized reactions of bystanders ducking and running, and the discovery of a single shell casing in the area.

The court evaluated the cumulative effect of the circumstantial evidence, including expert testimony on firearm operation and the non-assertive conduct of bystanders, and found the accused guilty on all counts.